MORE TERRORISTIC THREATS OF EVICTION BY CLEPTOCORPORATE PUBLIC SERVANTS


 
   

Department of Housing – Ministerial Guidelines

November 2007 – Water Usage Charging Policy

This document is known as the Ministerial Guidelines made pursuant to Section

19A of the Residential Tenancies Amendment (Social Housing) Act 2005.

 
 
 
       

The Department of Housing is responsible for:

Meeting all other costs associated with water provision such as water

connection charges, sewerage and other charges and provision of water in

common areas.

Monitoring water usage charges to ensure that, as a group, percentage

water charge tenants do not pay more than the cost of water usage for

shared meter properties.

The Department expects tenants to:

Arrange for prompt payment of their water usage charges

Pay their water account on or before the due date

Tell the Department immediately if they are unable to make a payment.

Where a tenant has difficulty paying their water usage charge, the

Department will work with and support that tenant towards resolving their

difficulty

Conserve water wherever possible

Be responsible for complying with any water restrictions put into place by

the local water authority

Pay any penalties resulting from their breach of water restrictions. These

penalties are imposed and collected by the local water authority, not the

Department.

Percentage Water Charge

From 5 November 2007, the water usage charge for shared meter properties shall

be 3.2% of the rent a tenant actually pays. Tenants start paying this charge from

the commencement of their tenancy and continue paying it until their tenancy

ends.

From 5 November 2007, the maximum percentage water charge shall be $4.85

per week.

The minimum water usage charge is $1 per week. This means that the

Department will waive the water usage charge if it is calculated at less than $1 per

week.

Tenants residing in headleased properties pay a percentage water charge

irrespective of whether the property has a shared or separate water meter.

   ####################################################################################################

   Once again on a letter to me dated 4 June 2010, i am threatened with eviction,  All because  i  am PROITESTING THEIR DISCRIMINATION

 especially in the light of the  flats east of Westfeilds all screened up beasuse the owners are made to under O H & S,

  1stly i get banned for week from the Warrawong community hall because i said to them it is the will of the people that your discrimination stops,.. along with  some other heated words, then  2ndly again i got banned from the hall for a week because i stood up against some members of the community being granted access to their community hall, whilst others were locked out.,  Then Im  told that White sugar is cheaper that Raw Sugar,…   ( at least that one got  fixed up)…    and now again another eviction notice,  so i rang Carol and informed her of the contents of the Ministeriaal guidelines.   What more can one do.?  She couldnt grasp the fact that on the 2nd page of the ministers documernt re section 19A social housing is says  the following  The local Water Authority Not the Department is to impose  penalties and collect  fines..  

Pay any penalties resulting from their breach of water restrict ions. These

penalties are imposed and collected by the local water authority, not the

Department.

  So what aree these clepto corporate supposid public servants, Comming at ?????????

  

   I thought that in a DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY what is good for one is good for all ,or is it that public housing tennants are  sub humans or not privy to the same rights that others are ????     HMMMMMMMMMM

 

 
 
 
    
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Organizations. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to MORE TERRORISTIC THREATS OF EVICTION BY CLEPTOCORPORATE PUBLIC SERVANTS

  1. peter says:

    If peop;le are willing to give up their soverign rights to water, and accept excess water charges unmetered! at thatit makes one wonder.. thought of private meter checkers?

  2. peter says:

    at 11.29am on 11/06/10 i rang the NSW Human Services Housing NSw on 0242245700 and i asked the switch op erator Michael "Is that the local Water Authorith " to which he replied ‘NO this is teh DOH"so we had a conversastion. RECORD

  3. Pamela says:

    Correction in my watercharges for past 12 months.. First bill covered nine months – but used the scale for 6 then followd latest bill by 3 months but charged for 6 — follow? I don’t as they have swindled the whole Shire! for 6 -Would work out at $7.50 a week but No, going by memory charges, were close to 720 for year & we have had the wettest in decades – close on 14 dollara week..I need to look into getting my metre cheked, or have reduced pressure installed, probably both needed.

  4. peter says:

    Human Rights Act 2004A2004-5An Act to respect, protect and promote human rights

  5. PeterBDunn says:

    https://peterbdunn.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/which-corporations-did-what-in-contravention-to-geneva-conventions/

    https://peterbdunn.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/australia-facing-corruption-crisis/

    http://www.forbesadvocate.com.au/story/1982732/water-rate-concerns/?cs=719
    “I’m just upset about paying three times more than what Housing NSW are being charged themselves.”

    While the Forbes Shire Council set the water rates for the town, they charge Housing NSW who in turn bill their tenants

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/icac-target-nick-di-girolamo-paid-himself-a-salary-of-more-than-1-million-a-year-at-australia-water-holdings/story-fni0cx12-1226855280693

    ICAC target Nick Di Girolamo was paying himself a salary of more than $1 million a year at Australian Water Holdings while the firm was on the brink of collapse.

    The businessman’s company also donated $67,637 to the Liberal and National Parties from 2008 to 2011 as it sought to resolve a contract dispute with Sydney Water despite Treasury advice saying it had “net assets worth $36”.
    ICAC, which will begin hearings into Australian Water Holdings on Monday, announced it would broaden its inquiries to look at Mr Di Girolamo’s salary and that of other AWH executives.
    Mr Di Girolamo was eventually forced out of the company in April 2013 with “a token payment” after he had the firm take a $5 million loan from four business people and was unable to pay it back,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s